5 ms·

And praised as a successful entrepreneur!

sidewndr46 3y ago
Depending on your definition of 'success' he may be one of the most successful. After all, he apparently managed to profit off a business that was worth little to nothing.
- Ekaros 3y ago
  Is success making lot of money for yourself. Or building a business that in general makes money and world a better place. That is generates societal wealth.
  - pessimizer 3y ago
    Personal success. He's certainly done a lot better personally than 99.99999% of people who have created something of value.
  - barelyauser 3y ago
    Success is personal. If your goal is to increase the amount of wealth for everyone then go for it. With that said, remember the following. While the economy is not zero sum and we can increase the amount of wealth in the world, power is zero sum. Power is finite and very scarce. You can create tremendous wealth and later find out it ended in the hand of a single person. And that person is not willing to share.
    - TheCleric 3y ago
      So would you have considered Bernie Madoff successful?
      - barelyauser 3y ago
        If his goal was to amass personal wealth at the expensive of others. But again, it depends on the person. A cab driver that barely makes ends meet can be successful while a multimillionaire isn't. If you wake up and do what you want to do, you are successful.
      - chirau 3y ago
        He was successful, then failed. The two are not mutually exclusive. He clearly set out to make a lot of money with his scheme, and he did that successfully. Then he failed.
      - throw9away6 3y ago
        Absolutely the man was a pioneer of the graft that is payment for order flow. His biggest mistake was living too long if he had died a year or 2 earlier he would have gotten away with it
    - bbor 3y ago
      On your deathbed, is “I made so much money and earned so much power” really going to be satisfying? As opposed to family/charity/invention/politics/etc. Not a rhetorical question, honestly curious what you think
      - barelyauser 3y ago
        I like making money and exercising power. I like the feeling of getting what I want when I want. To help people (family/charity) you need money, resources and health (being able to). Politics is fundamental at all times, meaning human relations. My wish is to die without a single penny in the bank. As I get older it gets clear how much time is worth. We have so little time to actually do what we want before we get too old.
      - chirau 3y ago
        For me, it will suffice. I grew up without it and I made it and my family will enjoy it. All else is secondary.
      - hotpotamus 3y ago
        You mean my cryogenic freezing chamber, and that's not cheap.
    - anonymouskimmer 3y ago
      > power is zero sum. Power is finite and very scarce. As technology[1] increases power increases. It is social capital to convince others that is zero sum (holding the number of people constant). [1] - and here I mean all technology, not what's commonly called 'tech' today. > You can create tremendous wealth and later find out it ended in the hand of a single person. And that person is not willing to share. Having a lot of money doesn't mean people have to do business with them. Undoubtedly some will, but you don't have to. It also doesn't prevent others from doing business with made-up currencies (e.g. Ithaca Hours, cryptocurrencies) or through barter.
      - barelyauser 3y ago
        Note the fact that I did not mention money. I mentioned wealth. Holding a huge bag of money is useless because as you stated, people can now choose to use another currency and I lose all my money, it becomes worthless. Or people can work for each other, without money. But what if I own all the productive land? What if I own a corporation that manufactures a product you depend on? This is wealth.
        anonymouskimmer 3y ago
        > But what if I own all the productive land? What if I own a corporation that manufactures a product you depend on? This is wealth. If people won't take your money to defend your wealth, then your wealth belongs to whoever takes it. It's only the rule of law that allows material wealth to exist. This is a very strong force, and is effectively insurmountable in most circumstances in lands with well-functioning governments. But things like the following do, very rarely, happen even in them: https://morbidology.com/the-town-that-got-away-with-murder/ https://morbidology.com/the-town-that-got-away-with-murder/
  - WrtCdEvrydy 3y ago
    > Is success making lot of money for yourself. It's all about getting the larger personal high score. Building a viable business is secondary.
  - moomoo11 3y ago
    The most fucked up thing I heard is about people investing in artificial wombs. You want to know the actual reason they’re doing this? It’s not because some restrictive laws were passed or to keep the physical toll low on the mom, etc. maybe it is, but that would be found in the marketing slide. “We are too generous with how much leave we offer” Everything is to extract as much value out of everyday things as possible. In this case, their thinking is along the lines of how can they can get women to stay in the office longer while the kid bakes at homes. Maybe offer a short leave after it’s ready. But the economy grinds harder since the woman employee didn’t have to take time off for doctors visits or to recuperate post birth. 90% of the ideas and products that come out of here have a solid dystopian underpinning to them.
    - justin66 3y ago
      As predicted in the final episode of Max Headroom, titled Baby Grobags. https://www.dailymotion.com/video/x4jl2mm https://www.dailymotion.com/video/x4jl2mm I don't know if it's the best intro to the series, it was the final episode in fact.
      - dwaite 3y ago
        TIL that George R R Martin wrote an unproduced "Xmas" script from the cancelled second season.
        justin66 3y ago
        Holy moly, I don't know how I never knew about this. https://georgerrmartin.com/notablog/2017/03/30/max-headroom-returns/ https://georgerrmartin.com/notablog/2017/03/30/max-headroom-... Mine was supposedly to be… hmmmmm, let me see now… the fourth episode of the series. My title was “Mister Meat.” Now, TV writing in those days was a two-step process: “story with option to teleplay,” they called it. You wrote a ‘story,’ a short plot outline with all the major beats and characters. Then, when the showrunners, studio, and network all approved it, you went on to write the teleplay. “Mister Meat” never got that far, alas. The showrunners and my fellow Maxxies loved it, as I recall, but when ABC saw the story they reacted with horror. Way too disturbing and offensive, they announced, driving a spike firmly through my concept and sending me on my way. Which I why I never got hired onto MAX HEADROOM and wound up on staff on BEAUTY AND THE BEAST instead. I got a second chance when MAX was picked up for a second season, however. As a freelancer, I got the choice assignment of writing the Christmas episode. And this time I went to town. Wrote the story, rewrote the story, wrote the teleplay, revised the teleplay. “Xmas” was the title of the episode, and it got as far as pre-production… And then the show was cancelled. Rather suddenly and unceremoniously, I must say. America was spared from celebrating Xmas with Max.
  - cronix 3y ago
    It can be, and is often, both. Not sure why you have an -or- separating them as if they're always exclusive to each other.
  - tarsinge 3y ago
    Another day, another premise of economic liberalism theory proven wrong.
  - kodah 3y ago
    Most businesses do not "make the world a better place". It was a mistake to ever believe that it's realistic that every business can do that and really only served the egos of those who have uttered those words. Most businesses are providing a service or a product, that thing may be useful, but there's a pretty high bar from that point to "making the world a better place".
    - robertlagrant 3y ago
      Well, for their customers they are making the world a better place. Given there's no absolute standard for that, people wanting your product or service so much they'll pay you money for it is about the best measure we have.
      - chirau 3y ago
        Well, in that case, WeWork definitely was a better place for a bunch of creatives and entrepreneurs in NYC and other cities.
      - SantalBlush 3y ago
        This is a well-established and researched part of market failure. It involves the idea of negative externalities, like how a market for heroin creates a social cost that is borne by the general public. And you're right that a market transaction is the best measure of "good" that we have. To get some sense of "what society might pay" to limit or eliminate such a market, an analyst must resort to more difficult methods like cost-benefit analysis. It's a huge topic and is used by major governments.
        robertlagrant 3y ago
        Indeed. But given negative externalities are not the job of companies to compute (because they don't get to define them) the establishing and enforcing of non-mark-distorting negative externalities is government's, and it's government's failure when it's not done, or not done well.
      - RugnirViking 3y ago
  - 35997279 3y ago
    [dead]
  - rufus_foreman 3y ago
    Success as an individual is doing well for yourself. Success as a society is building a system where people do well for themselves by making other people better off.
- laratied 3y ago
  [flagged]
vondur 3y ago
Didn’t he use money from WeWork buy the office buildings in his name and lease them back to WeWork?

Depending on your definition of 'success' he may be one of the most successful. After all, he apparently managed to profit off a business that was worth little to nothing.

Ekaros 3y ago
Is success making lot of money for yourself. Or building a business that in general makes money and world a better place. That is generates societal wealth.
- pessimizer 3y ago
  Personal success. He's certainly done a lot better personally than 99.99999% of people who have created something of value.
- barelyauser 3y ago
  Success is personal. If your goal is to increase the amount of wealth for everyone then go for it. With that said, remember the following. While the economy is not zero sum and we can increase the amount of wealth in the world, power is zero sum. Power is finite and very scarce. You can create tremendous wealth and later find out it ended in the hand of a single person. And that person is not willing to share.
  - TheCleric 3y ago
    So would you have considered Bernie Madoff successful?
    - barelyauser 3y ago
      If his goal was to amass personal wealth at the expensive of others. But again, it depends on the person. A cab driver that barely makes ends meet can be successful while a multimillionaire isn't. If you wake up and do what you want to do, you are successful.
    - chirau 3y ago
      He was successful, then failed. The two are not mutually exclusive. He clearly set out to make a lot of money with his scheme, and he did that successfully. Then he failed.
    - throw9away6 3y ago
      Absolutely the man was a pioneer of the graft that is payment for order flow. His biggest mistake was living too long if he had died a year or 2 earlier he would have gotten away with it
  - bbor 3y ago
    On your deathbed, is “I made so much money and earned so much power” really going to be satisfying? As opposed to family/charity/invention/politics/etc. Not a rhetorical question, honestly curious what you think
    - barelyauser 3y ago
      I like making money and exercising power. I like the feeling of getting what I want when I want. To help people (family/charity) you need money, resources and health (being able to). Politics is fundamental at all times, meaning human relations. My wish is to die without a single penny in the bank. As I get older it gets clear how much time is worth. We have so little time to actually do what we want before we get too old.
    - chirau 3y ago
      For me, it will suffice. I grew up without it and I made it and my family will enjoy it. All else is secondary.
    - hotpotamus 3y ago
      You mean my cryogenic freezing chamber, and that's not cheap.
  - anonymouskimmer 3y ago
    > power is zero sum. Power is finite and very scarce. As technology[1] increases power increases. It is social capital to convince others that is zero sum (holding the number of people constant). [1] - and here I mean all technology, not what's commonly called 'tech' today. > You can create tremendous wealth and later find out it ended in the hand of a single person. And that person is not willing to share. Having a lot of money doesn't mean people have to do business with them. Undoubtedly some will, but you don't have to. It also doesn't prevent others from doing business with made-up currencies (e.g. Ithaca Hours, cryptocurrencies) or through barter.
    - barelyauser 3y ago
      Note the fact that I did not mention money. I mentioned wealth. Holding a huge bag of money is useless because as you stated, people can now choose to use another currency and I lose all my money, it becomes worthless. Or people can work for each other, without money. But what if I own all the productive land? What if I own a corporation that manufactures a product you depend on? This is wealth.
      - anonymouskimmer 3y ago
        > But what if I own all the productive land? What if I own a corporation that manufactures a product you depend on? This is wealth. If people won't take your money to defend your wealth, then your wealth belongs to whoever takes it. It's only the rule of law that allows material wealth to exist. This is a very strong force, and is effectively insurmountable in most circumstances in lands with well-functioning governments. But things like the following do, very rarely, happen even in them: https://morbidology.com/the-town-that-got-away-with-murder/ https://morbidology.com/the-town-that-got-away-with-murder/
- WrtCdEvrydy 3y ago
  > Is success making lot of money for yourself. It's all about getting the larger personal high score. Building a viable business is secondary.
- moomoo11 3y ago
  The most fucked up thing I heard is about people investing in artificial wombs. You want to know the actual reason they’re doing this? It’s not because some restrictive laws were passed or to keep the physical toll low on the mom, etc. maybe it is, but that would be found in the marketing slide. “We are too generous with how much leave we offer” Everything is to extract as much value out of everyday things as possible. In this case, their thinking is along the lines of how can they can get women to stay in the office longer while the kid bakes at homes. Maybe offer a short leave after it’s ready. But the economy grinds harder since the woman employee didn’t have to take time off for doctors visits or to recuperate post birth. 90% of the ideas and products that come out of here have a solid dystopian underpinning to them.
  - justin66 3y ago
    As predicted in the final episode of Max Headroom, titled Baby Grobags. https://www.dailymotion.com/video/x4jl2mm https://www.dailymotion.com/video/x4jl2mm I don't know if it's the best intro to the series, it was the final episode in fact.
    - dwaite 3y ago
      TIL that George R R Martin wrote an unproduced "Xmas" script from the cancelled second season.
      - justin66 3y ago
        Holy moly, I don't know how I never knew about this. https://georgerrmartin.com/notablog/2017/03/30/max-headroom-returns/ https://georgerrmartin.com/notablog/2017/03/30/max-headroom-... Mine was supposedly to be… hmmmmm, let me see now… the fourth episode of the series. My title was “Mister Meat.” Now, TV writing in those days was a two-step process: “story with option to teleplay,” they called it. You wrote a ‘story,’ a short plot outline with all the major beats and characters. Then, when the showrunners, studio, and network all approved it, you went on to write the teleplay. “Mister Meat” never got that far, alas. The showrunners and my fellow Maxxies loved it, as I recall, but when ABC saw the story they reacted with horror. Way too disturbing and offensive, they announced, driving a spike firmly through my concept and sending me on my way. Which I why I never got hired onto MAX HEADROOM and wound up on staff on BEAUTY AND THE BEAST instead. I got a second chance when MAX was picked up for a second season, however. As a freelancer, I got the choice assignment of writing the Christmas episode. And this time I went to town. Wrote the story, rewrote the story, wrote the teleplay, revised the teleplay. “Xmas” was the title of the episode, and it got as far as pre-production… And then the show was cancelled. Rather suddenly and unceremoniously, I must say. America was spared from celebrating Xmas with Max.
- cronix 3y ago
  It can be, and is often, both. Not sure why you have an -or- separating them as if they're always exclusive to each other.
- tarsinge 3y ago
  Another day, another premise of economic liberalism theory proven wrong.
- kodah 3y ago
  Most businesses do not "make the world a better place". It was a mistake to ever believe that it's realistic that every business can do that and really only served the egos of those who have uttered those words. Most businesses are providing a service or a product, that thing may be useful, but there's a pretty high bar from that point to "making the world a better place".
  - robertlagrant 3y ago
    Well, for their customers they are making the world a better place. Given there's no absolute standard for that, people wanting your product or service so much they'll pay you money for it is about the best measure we have.
    - chirau 3y ago
      Well, in that case, WeWork definitely was a better place for a bunch of creatives and entrepreneurs in NYC and other cities.
    - SantalBlush 3y ago
      This is a well-established and researched part of market failure. It involves the idea of negative externalities, like how a market for heroin creates a social cost that is borne by the general public. And you're right that a market transaction is the best measure of "good" that we have. To get some sense of "what society might pay" to limit or eliminate such a market, an analyst must resort to more difficult methods like cost-benefit analysis. It's a huge topic and is used by major governments.
      - robertlagrant 3y ago
        Indeed. But given negative externalities are not the job of companies to compute (because they don't get to define them) the establishing and enforcing of non-mark-distorting negative externalities is government's, and it's government's failure when it's not done, or not done well.
    - RugnirViking 3y ago
- 35997279 3y ago
  [dead]
- rufus_foreman 3y ago
  Success as an individual is doing well for yourself. Success as a society is building a system where people do well for themselves by making other people better off.
laratied 3y ago
[flagged]

vondur 3y ago

Didn’t he use money from WeWork buy the office buildings in his name and lease them back to WeWork?